| Literature DB >> 27180625 |
Xiaowen He1, Jie Pan1,2, Mingxia Pan3, Jiawei Wang4, Jingfen Dong5, Hongdi Yuan6, Lei Zhou7, Minhua Chen8, Yunfen Chen9, Yiping Lu10, Huiqin Gu11, Yanshu Chen12, Liqin Wu13, Yajuan Chen14, Fubi Jin15, Bijun Li16, Wei Gu1.
Abstract
AIMS/Entities:
Keywords: Dietary; Lifestyle; Type 2 diabetes
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27180625 PMCID: PMC4931203 DOI: 10.1111/jdi.12458
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Investig ISSN: 2040-1116 Impact factor: 4.232
Clinical characteristics of the patients
|
| Age (years) | BMI (kg/m2) | Waist (cm) | WHR | BP target achievement | Diet control rate | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| ||
| Total | 607 | 56.39 ± 12.29 | 23.73 ± 3.68 | 85.56 ± 10.37 | 0.91 ± 0.07 | 79.08% | 68.70% | ||||||
| Sex | 0.088 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.571 | 0.005 | |||||||
| Male | 345 | 55.73 ± 12.73 | 24.32 ± 3.53 | 88.08 ± 9.91 | 0.93 ± 0.07 | 78.26% | 64.06% | ||||||
| Female | 262 | 57.27 ± 11.64 | 22.94 ± 3.73 | 82.24 ± 10.03 | 0.90 ± 0.08 | 80.15% | 74.81% | ||||||
| Age | / | 0.865 | 0.182 | 0.089 | <0.001 | 0.023 | |||||||
| 18–39 | 51 | 32.47 ± 5.63 | 23.60 ± 4.25 | 84.42 ± 11.50 | 0.90 ± 0.08 | 88.24% | 18–39 vs 40–59: <0.001 | 62.75% | 18–39 vs 40–59: 0.03 | ||||
| 40–59 | 299 | 50.84 ± 5.47 | 23.76 ± 3.48 | 85.08 ± 10.02 | 0.91 ± 0.07 | 84.28% | 40–59 vs ≥60: 0.018 | 64.55% | 40–59 vs ≥60: >0.05 | ||||
| ≥60 | 257 | 67.60 ± 6.36 | 23.71 ± 3.80 | 86.33 ± 10.52 | 0.92 ± 0.08 | 71.21% | 18–39 vs ≥60: <0.001 | 74.71% | 18–39 vs ≥60: 0.03 | ||||
| Region | 0.552 | 0.163 | 0.053 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.069 | |||||||
| North | 339 | 56.74 ± 12.43 | 23.59 ± 3.83 | 84.87 ± 10.46 | 0.91 ± 0.07 | North vs east: >0.05 | 83.78% | North vs east: 0.001 | 72.57% | ||||
| East | 156 | 56.42 ± 11.92 | 24.16 ± 3.54 | 85.79 ± 10.33 | 0.90 ± 0.07 | East vs midwest: <0.001 | 80.77% | East vs midwest: <0.001 | 64.10% | ||||
| Midwest | 112 | 55.29 ± 12.40 | 23.54 ± 3.34 | 87.30 ± 10.01 | 0.94 ± 0.08 | North vs midwest: <0.001 | 62.50% | North vs midwest: 0.001 | 63.39% | ||||
Data presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or as percentage. Basic characteristics, such as body mass index (BMI), waist circumference and waist‐to‐hip ratio (WHR) are shown. The percentage of patients whose blood pressure (BP) was under 140/90 mmHg was recorded as ‘BP target achievement’ for each group. The percentage of patients who had ever tried to control their daily diets was recorded as ‘diet control rate’ for each group.
Figure 1Dietary preferences of the patients. Data are shown in the percentage of the total population for each group. (a) Dietary preference for meat or vegetarian diets of the patients. Blue, patients who have meat diets; yellow, patients who have vegetarian diets; gray, patients who have moderate diets. (b) The preference for salty or light flavors of the patients. Blue, patients who prefer salty flavors; yellow, patients who prefer light flavors; gray, patients who prefer moderate flavors.
Eating patterns and macronutrient distribution of the patients
|
| Total energy (kcal) | Carbohydrate (kcal) | Protein (kcal) | Fat (kcal) | Percentage of total energy | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carbohydrate | Protein | Fat | |||||||||||||
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| Mean ± SD |
| ||
| Total | 607 | 1887.71 ± 575.10 | 1144.59 ± 381.36 | 249.07 ± 98.70 | 494.05 ± 285.79 | 61.36 ± 11.59% | 13.29 ± 3.37% | 25.35 ± 11.16% | |||||||
| Sex | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.001 | 0.964 | 0.003 | 0.644 | ||||||||
| Male | 345 | 2027.28 ± 598.93 | 1223.80 ± 392.47 | 274.23 ± 107.31 | 529.25 ± 296.69 | 61.09 ± 11.41% | 13.62 ± 3.47% | 25.29 ± 10.83% | |||||||
| Female | 262 | 1703.93 ± 485.26 | 1040.27 ± 339.76 | 215.95 ± 74.18 | 447.70 ± 264.24 | 61.71 ± 11.83% | 12.85 ± 3.20% | 25.44 ± 11.60% | |||||||
| Age | 0.039 | 0.040 | 0.097 | 0.205 | 0.784 | 0.303 | 0.502 | ||||||||
| 18–39 | 51 | 2060.18 ± 772.69 | 18–39 vs 40–59: >0.05 | 1256.00 ± 521.06 | 18–39 vs 40–59: >0.05 | 284.47 ± 133.55 | 519.71 ± 305.30 | 61.61 ± 10.28% | 13.73 ± 3.36% | 24.66 ± 9.70% | |||||
| 40–59 | 299 | 1923.47 ± 567.48 | 40–59 vs ≥60: >0.05 | 1161.30 ± 375.12 | 40–59 vs ≥60: >0.05 | 251.73 ± 102.34 | 510.44 ± 288.87 | 61.02 ± 11.98% | 13.18 ± 3.59% | 25.80 ± 11.31% | |||||
| ≥60 | 257 | 1811.88 ± 527.50 | 18–39 vs ≥60: 0.014 | 1103.04 ± 350.59 | 18–39 vs ≥60: 0.026 | 238.96 ± 83.81 | 469.89 ± 277.42 | 61.70 ± 11.40% | 13.34 ± 3.12% | 24.96 ± 11.26% | |||||
| Region | 0.064 | 0.370 | 0.579 | 0.077 | 0.368 | <0.001 | 0.049 | ||||||||
| North | 339 | 1916.52 ± 523.01 | 1156.31 ± 354.64 | 246.04 ± 95.86 | 514.17 ± 283.84 | 61.03 ± 11.39% | 12.87 ± 3.28% | North vs east: >0.05 | 26.10 ± 11.21% | North vs east: >0.05 | |||||
| East | 156 | 1844.57 ± 529.85 | 1113.92 ± 331.37 | 245.05 ± 82.40 | 485.60 ± 277.25 | 61.16 ± 11.49% | 13.52 ± 3.58% | East vs midwest: >0.05 | 25.32 ± 10.71% | East vs midwest: >0.05 | |||||
| Midwest | 112 | 1860.62 ± 758.17 | 1151.82 ± 505.85 | 263.86 ± 124.3 | 444.94 ± 299.10 | 62.62 ± 12.32% | 14.25 ± 3.16% | North vs midwest: <0.001 | 23.13 ± 11.42% | North vs midwest: 0.044 | |||||
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD). The detailed dietary intake for 1 day was recorded using the 24‐h recall method. The amount of the carbohydrate, protein and fat containing in the food was calculated and shown in the table in the form of calories. Total energy was calculated as a sum of the calories from the three macronutrients. The macronutrient distribution was shown as the percentage of the total energy.
Figure 2The physical activity of the patients. The time spent carrying out activities for 1 week was evaluated. Patients were classified into different groups according to sex, age or region. The sitting and sleeping mode are shown here as the dominant routine style. (a). Analysis between male and female patients. The male patients spent more time carrying out vigorous activity as well as sitting than the female patients. Analysis among (b) different age groups and (c) different region groups did not show any significant difference. *P < 0.05.